[16:56] <matthias_samwald> matthias: indeed this is a strong point of using OWL and reasoners for this (you can throw any level of abstraction into the reasoner and it can work with it and indentify inconsistencies)

+

+

[16:57] <michel> CBO implemented in EHR systems.

+

+

[16:57] <michel> bobf: if we could leverage this, we could get it into practice

+

+

[16:57] <matthias_samwald> bobf: basing on CBO could speed up adoption.

+

+

[16:57] <matthias_samwald> bobf: if we could get cerner on board here, our work could be used in practice quickly

+

+

[16:58] <matthias_samwald> bobf: PGRN is taking a very exhaustive approache for manual curation of gene-drug interactions

+

+

[16:59] <matthias_samwald> ... but if gene-gene-drug or gene-drug-drug interactions come into play, this approach falls apart very quickly. ontologies could help here as well.

+

+

[17:00] <matthias_samwald> ... drug-drug interactions and recommend alternative treatments that are actually better and valid (rather than leaving clinicians to use trial&error to find better treatment)

+

+

[17:01] <bobP> (should we just google Cerner CBO?)

+

+

[17:02] <matthias_samwald> matthias: mapping to CBO is our best bet, trying to extend/ontologize it seems like a lost cause

+

+

[17:02] <matthias_samwald> bobf: good point, maybe we should point out to them what it is needed.

+

+

[17:03] <matthias_samwald> ... CBO currently is more of a taxonomy

+

+

[17:04] <matthias_samwald> bobf: the Medicine Safety Code (MSC) is a very neat idea, i think we can create some very quick early adoption

+

+

[17:05] <matthias_samwald> bobf: PGRN-seq will be used by PGRN and others

+

+

[17:05] <matthias_samwald> bobf: need a way of exchaning information across clinical settings. chip is only limited to 84 genes, maybe only a couple of dozen are pharmacologically actionable

[16:56] <matthias_samwald> matthias: indeed this is a strong point of using OWL and reasoners for this (you can throw any level of abstraction into the reasoner and it can work with it and indentify inconsistencies)

[16:57] <michel> CBO implemented in EHR systems.

[16:57] <michel> bobf: if we could leverage this, we could get it into practice

[16:57] <matthias_samwald> bobf: basing on CBO could speed up adoption.

[16:57] <matthias_samwald> bobf: if we could get cerner on board here, our work could be used in practice quickly

[16:58] <matthias_samwald> bobf: PGRN is taking a very exhaustive approache for manual curation of gene-drug interactions

[16:59] <matthias_samwald> ... but if gene-gene-drug or gene-drug-drug interactions come into play, this approach falls apart very quickly. ontologies could help here as well.

[17:00] <matthias_samwald> ... drug-drug interactions and recommend alternative treatments that are actually better and valid (rather than leaving clinicians to use trial&error to find better treatment)

[17:01] <bobP> (should we just google Cerner CBO?)

[17:02] <matthias_samwald> matthias: mapping to CBO is our best bet, trying to extend/ontologize it seems like a lost cause

[17:02] <matthias_samwald> bobf: good point, maybe we should point out to them what it is needed.

[17:03] <matthias_samwald> ... CBO currently is more of a taxonomy

[17:04] <matthias_samwald> bobf: the Medicine Safety Code (MSC) is a very neat idea, i think we can create some very quick early adoption

[17:05] <matthias_samwald> bobf: PGRN-seq will be used by PGRN and others

[17:05] <matthias_samwald> bobf: need a way of exchaning information across clinical settings. chip is only limited to 84 genes, maybe only a couple of dozen are pharmacologically actionable